The Chevrolet Camaro has long enjoyed a reputation for great value and high performance but, well, nobody’s ever accused it of being refined. After all, the Camaro has always been about great spec numbers and a rumbling V8. If you wanted a polished ride and fancy features, you could pay extra for one of those foreign cars thankyouverymuch. Well, the Camaro now rides on a platform shared with Cadillac and, while it still offers a ridiculous amount of V8 power at an affordable price, it’s now comfortable enough to chauffeur your mother-in-law around in. In the front seat, that is.

About that back seat. It was just my friend Jason and I driving this Camaro without any passengers to ferry around so we didn’t have to use it. Fortunately. Looking back from the comfortable and supportive front seats, the rear looked like an absolute torture chamber. We decided to test it by motoring the power front seats a little further forward – so both of us, at 5’11’’, would still be comfortable – and then climbing into the back seat.

Surprise, surprise! Legroom was actually acceptable and I had some degree of motion available. Oh, if only I could say the same about headroom. There’s literally no way I could sit up straight and I felt, if I sat there for too long, I’d end up with a dowager’s hump.

As for the trunk, it’s deep but has a small opening and an awkward shape. The Camaro is a car designed for two people with an overnight bag each, nothing more.

Such a pity. I’ve always been a sedan man – they’re practical enough without carrying the stigma of vehicles that are too practical – but driving the Camaro was seriously tempting me. Add a couple of doors, Chevy, and let’s talk.

You could get the Camaro’s platform-mate, the Cadillac ATS, for the same money but at that price there’s only a 2.0 turbo and less performance hardware than the Camaro. And although more habitable than most critics acknowledge, the ATS is hardly a DeVille in the back seat.

Let’s talk about that performance hardware. Once you step up to the $36k Camaro 1SS, Chevy figures you’re a serious performance car buyer and not a poseur. The standard transmission is a six-speed manual with an automatic rev-match downshift function, but our tester had the optional eight-speed automatic with paddle shifters. There are adjustable driving modes – choose between Snow/Ice, Tour, Sport, and Track – controlled by a switch on the center console. Also standard are 20-inch wheels, four-piston Brembo brakes, FE3 sport-tuned suspension, a mechanical limited-slip differential and adjustable gauges. There’s also plenty of comfort and convenience features like a 7-inch MyLink touchscreen, Bluetooth, 4G LTE Wi-Fi connectivity, leather-wrapped steering wheel, reversing camera, and keyless ignition and entry

Some of you may be balking at the price. When the Camaro returned in 2010, the 1SS retailed for around $30k, or the price of a top-spec W-Body Impala. Now, the 1SS retails for $38k, coincidentally around the price of a top-spec Epsilon Impala. But both the Impala and Camaro have improved greatly – the Impala more so, mind you – and the thought of paying $36k for either is no longer a ridiculous notion. And heck, it’s a Chevy—you can probably get money on the hood. It’s worth noting, though, the Mustang GT is priced $3k lower. You get launch control and the option of a 10-speed auto, but you go without the Track driving mode and Brembo brakes. You also lose 35 ft-lb of torque. The 2018 Mustang is an impressive car, however, and the lower pricing sweetens the deal – perhaps that’s why Mustang sales have risen considerably since its redesign in 2015, while the Camaro has faltered. In some months, even the Challenger has outsold the Camaro.

If you want to make your Camaro even more of a weapon, the new-for-2018 1LE Track Performance package adds six-piston Brembo front brakes, firmer FE4 suspension tune, Magnetic Ride Control and an electronic limited-slip differential, among other features. Quite a bit of kit, even for $6500! The 2SS package adds luxury features like dual-zone climate control and heated and ventilated front seats, the latter of which aren’t even available on the ATS. The days of stripper Camaros with Rubbermaid interiors are gone.

There’s still hard plastic inside but Chevy learned something with the ’10 Camaro: people don’t care as much about hard plastics if you just make sure the interior doesn’t look like it came from a freakin’ Cavalier. The new Camaro has a stylish cabin with a clean and simple layout and some nice touches like stitching and a little luminescent strip atop the infotainment screen.

And unlike Camaros of the ‘90s and before, this interior is actually well screwed together. You’re going to want to option the sunroof, though, if you want the interior to feel more hospitable. The high beltline is every bit as bad as you would imagine. On the plus side, the 1SS’s standard cloth seats are attractive, comfortable and supportive. You’ll appreciate the support when you take the car for a drive. Ahem, a responsible, law-abiding drive.

The aforementioned high beltline does hamper visibility, more so than with other modern cars. For some reason, Chevrolet designers decided to shrink the glasshouse even further when the car was moved to the Alpha platform. It looks almost comically small and distracts from what is otherwise a handsome, if decidedly subtle, evolution of the basic Zeta Camaro shape.

This car will make you love infrastructure. Specifically, highway on-ramps and tunnels. The 455 hp, 455 ft-lbs 6.2 V8 feels stupid fast and indeed it is: 0-60 is achieved in just 3.9 seconds. As for tunnels, the exhaust sounds marvellous when you use the paddles to knock the car back into 2nd and then mash the gas pedal.

A pity for Chevy, then, that the 2018 Mustang 5.0 now almost matches its 0-60 time despite its torque deficit. Last year’s Mustang was almost a second slower to 60 mph, thus making the extra $3k for the Camaro seem somewhat reasonable.

The Camaro’s handling ability is excellent. The car hugs the road tightly in corners and ample grip is afforded by the big 20-inchers. Of course, Detroit’s neat, hub-and-spoke street grid – although a town planner’s delight – doesn’t allow for much in the way of corner-carving. This is a car that begs to be taken out onto a twisty, mountainous road. Do it for me.

One thing Detroit is good for, however, is providing exquisite scenery. Here’s the Camaro in front of Michigan Central Station, built in 1912 and closed in 1988. After all these years, the grand old building is finally being refurbished – these windows were fitted in 2014 – although it’s not yet known what it will be used for.

You’ll find something fascinating to look at down almost any Detroit street. Many visitors to Detroit seek out “ruin porn” – to the chagrin of some locals – and I’ll admit Jason and I did go looking for some particularly derelict parts of town. But Detroit is also full of charming, well-maintained neighborhoods and stunning architecture. While we were gawking at buildings, we noticed our Camaro was also getting some looks. I’m not sure whether that was because of its muscular flanks or because it had a rental car bar code and we were driving down the back streets of Poletown.

To judge ride quality, we employed the Detroit Test. It sounds complicated but it’s simple: we just found some really nasty, poorly-surfaced roads in Detroit – of which there are many – and, well, drove across them. Even in Track mode impacts are well-absorbed, and you’ll only want to select Tour if you’re doing a lot of highway driving. The Camaro is surprisingly comfortable and well-behaved and you could probably just tootle to the mall and to your office each day with no problems, enjoying the simple and straightforward MyLink interface and comfortable seats. Until, that is, you press the gas pedal on a highway on-ramp and get pressed back in your seat. Then, you’ll want to play hooky and head for the hills.

It just doesn’t make sense to buy a Camaro with the V6 or the turbo four. Don’t get me wrong, you’re still getting a great car. But it’s like going to the Cheesecake Factory for dinner and not getting cheesecake for dessert—you probably had a good meal, but you’ve kind of missed the point.

The Camaro is a genuine performance machine and the brawny 6.2 V8 imbues it with a raw energy that’s utterly intoxicating. The fact it can be driven so sedately and be so comfortable gives it an endearing Jekyll and Hyde quality. The only problem is that pesky Ford with the cheaper sticker price.

61 Comments

To me, I was never that big on the fifth gen Camaro. For a long time, the styling did nothing for me. But, as of this new refresh, I’m starting to warm a bit more to the way it looks. It’s decidedly more aggressive styling has made me take notice of the car more than I would have years ago, and the end result is not that bad all things considered.

The closest experience I got was sitting in one. There was some car booths at the Del Mar Fairgrounds last year and Chevy represented. I decided to go check it out and the Camaro was probably the big ticket item that was being shown. No one had any rules against sitting in the car, so long as you didn’t destroy the interior, so I got in the driver’s side of all the cars and SUVs/CUVs/Trucks there. When I got in the Camaro, I was turned off by two things.

1: The visibility. People weren’t exaggerating about the lack of visibility in this thing. When I looked and saw my blind spot was a tiny speck of glass about the size of my fist, I was shocked. Changing lanes in this thing would be hell on earth if I were to get on the road in one.

2: The seat position. Granted this might’ve been the position a previous person had set it at and didn’t reset, but with the seat fully back, it does not create a comfortable experience. Everything was too far away, my arms were locked forward like Frankenstein on the wheel, and despite being 6’2 and possessing long, scrawny legs, the top of my shoe could barely touch the gas pedal. I’m sure had I adjusted the seat, I could’ve found a suitable driving position, but I found from my experience, it was a car that did not lend itself to being relaxed.

Other than that, I found the interior nicely appointed, well built, and of pretty good overall quality and despite the low roofline and machine gun bunker visibility, I fit in fine without my head rubbing the top of the car or conking myself on the roof as I squeezed myself in. I didn’t find it as comfortable as the rental Challenger’s I had been passenger in, but I was pleasantly surprised nonetheless.

” But both the Impala and Camaro have improved greatly – the Impala more so, mind you – and the thought of paying $36k for either is no longer a ridiculous notion.”

I don’t really think the value proposition in a full size sedan is a good deal. After incentives, a similarly equipped Malibu is probably almost 10K less than an Impala, and the midsize doesn’t give up much in terms of space.

Lots of 2017 Impalas and Lacrosses sitting on dealer lots still at this point in the 2018 MY. In my area that $38K Impala Premiere with V6 and all the toys is being advertised at $32K roughly. The thing is a Lacrosse Essence (which has heated seats etc (but not the top trim package) has had it’s price slashed from $42K to about $32K.

If I was buying a sedan and was going to spend most of my time highway driving (where the fuel economy difference between a V6 and turbo-4 is almost nil) I’d be dealing hard on a full size sedan. They’re almost lot poison at this point.

Excellent review Will! Glad you were able to get some extended seat time in the latest Camaro, as car which I have yet to drive.

I think Chevy is making strides with this car, especially given the numerous improvements over the previous generation. This class of vehicle, however, just will never be a car that truly appeals to me.

That rear roofline is ridiculous though! They should’ve just made it a 2-seater!

GM has come a long way with their products over the last decade and the Camaro sounds like it’s among their best right now. Their MyLink system is also very user-friendly as I’ve become much more acquainted with it in the 2018 Impala I have at work.

I’m glad you were able to experience the terrific combination of a Camaro in Detroit – it’s a great match.

They’re not selling out here in coastal California. My uncalibrated automotive census-ometer records about ten late model Mustangs for every “new” Camaro on the streets here, though that may be skewed by the large number of rental Mustangs, plus the fact that we have no GM dealership in town, only Ford and Dodge/Chrysler (of the domestics). When these Camaros were re-introduced, I thought it was a bad parody of the first gen, but with time, refinement of the design, and perhaps me opening my mind a bit, I enjoy seeing one.

What is the constant insistence of grumping about “hard plastic” when it comes to the interiors? It seems like no reviewer, professional, amateur or blogger, can talking about the interior of any car without having to bring up hard plastic. Like it’s something that automatically makes a car completely unworthy of buying. Or at least a “I gotta find something to complain about.”

I should think that hard plastic would be necessary in the construction of automotive interiors (do we really want to go back to either wood or sheet metal?), providing a freedom of design that wasn’t possible sixty years ago. And I certainly wouldn’t want said hard plastics in places where I rest my elbows, etc., but this constant mandatory-ness of mention has me wondering.

As does your constant mandatory-ness response to seeing the words “hard plastic” in a review.

Making mention of the ambiance of the interior of a car kind of makes sense, considering that’s where owners normally spend all their time when they’re in it. Or maybe you prefer to ride in the engine compartment, or the trunk?

I’ve remarked on this same thing. It’s as though there are people going around poking and petting the dash as they drive. I’ve heard the hypothesis that the hard plastics thing was originally devised by Consumer Reports as a way to bash American cars back in the day. I’m not convinced by that explanation, but the only time I touch the dash of my own car is when I’m detailing it and getting the dust out.

And the result? Car interiors (and dashes) are generally a lot more pleasant to look at, or even touch, if you like, than they were in the past.

Let’s face it, interiors of cars like the gen3 Camaro spawned the terms “Playskool” and “Rubbermaid” for a good reason. The plastics were crude, often with sharp edges, and fit poorly together. Criticism is often what it takes to instigate change. And interiors have come a mighty long way.

I get what you are trying to say, but I digress. Aesthetically certain plastics not only are hard, they look it, too. When I hear reviews say this, I interpret that statement more as “this looks cheap”. Sit in a Dodge Caliber circa 2007, and say with a straight face that “hard plastic” is a nitpick.

The Dodge Caliber is a fine example of a terrible car. I never even bothered with a test drive when they came out (happened to be in the market for a new car at the time), as just sitting in it put me off.

But I ended up with a Honda Element, with not a soft surface in the whole car, sharp edges I could feel on the steering wheel where the pieces didn’t fit together just right, and a center “console” that broke in the first year.

The interior of that car, though, was fairly attractive to the eye, and that opinion did not change over the eight years I had that car.

I was thinking about this just over lunch as I drove my ’95 F-150 to collect my food. The one bit of padded dash is now hard as a rock since the plastics have aged, but the design is still attractive.

If they think something’s unattractive, they should say so. Instead, they go on about hard plastics in an attempt to create an air of (false) credibility and objectiveness around themselves and their critiques.

If you’re spending tens of thousands of dollars on a new car, it definitely pays to look at the interior. If you’re buying a couch, mattress, or table, you’d want to know how it feels, right? Cars are no different.

Oh BS. Interior design trends are constantly In flux between overstylized space ship and stark minimalism, and there were premier examples of both approaches 60 years ago before the plastic age really took off. Yeah, they were made of potentially unsafe materials(both in hardness and glare) but from a pure aesthetic measure interiors are arguably the one area of classic cars where the modern buyer could be envious of.

The particular irony of that statement is that late model interiors have adopted woods and metals (or simulated) to break up the sea of monotone plastics had in the 90s and early aughts. And some automakers have even gone so far to add fake STITCHING to corners, directly simulating the past practice during the days of wrapping vinyl over a metal/foam core. Plastics are simply cheaper to manufacture, they can just squirt out a dash and some panels all day long.

There is a legitimacy to your post I agree with – not all modern interiors suck and there is a large contingent of people who wrongfully call some car interiors hard plasticy simply because there’s a lack of contrast to break things up, as was often the case in 90s cars, despite never sitting in one and actually realizing many are in fact soft touch they clamor for (personal note, in a recent topic 94+ Thunderbirds and Cougars are accused of this, but few pieces within reach aren’t soft touch) – IF the plastics have a convincing grain and aren’t used where I can readily touch them, I really don’t mind the practice. But automakers, enabled partially by these high beltlines and standard A/C, have unfortunately let the tops of the door panels go stiff nubby plastic, exactly where I like to rest my arm(I don’t like the door panel armrests in any car I’ve ever been in).

Sorry, but I’m going to rain on this parade. The current Camaro strikes me as a rolling cartoon–the ridiculously squashed roofline, the wildly over-styled interior, the extremely limited usefulness (and I say that in the context of cars that aren’t meant to be practical, but really….). For me, I’d take the more attractive Mustang any day, and frankly would rather have a Challenger than either–if the goal is big, brash, old-fashioned, obnoxious American muscle car, how can you top the Dodge?

All that said, I love reading this review. The pictures are excellent and the information provided is so useful and realistic–it gives me a great handle on a car that I have never personally driven. I also agree with the assessment that if you are going to get one of these, then get the V8. Otherwise, why bother with such a flamboyant design? I’d steer anyone considering a 4-cylinder Camaro right over to the Honda Civic Si Coupe. It’s more in keeping with the original Pony Car ethos (sporty, stylish car based on inexpensive compact car mechanicals), and I think the Honda would be far more satisfying for most owners in the long run.

And the first generation design was unremarkable in the first place, it was a Mustang hardtop with the the good details smoothed out. The Camaro cameinto it’s own in 1970, I feel like all the hype surrounding first gens(really, 1969) is just because they were made less long, therefore = better.

Have to agree with you here. I had a friend that bought a Red Jewel V6 LT in 2011, and I was not impressed. The exterior appearance I liked. Then I rode in it… Like sitting in a bunker. At least the backseat was passable for me at 6″1′. This new one, just looking at the photo of William in the back, looks impossible. And I don’t find the sixth generation’s looks to be an improvement, both inside and out. Not for me.

If the car were more successful, perhaps GM could afford the investment in a second platform, shrunk slightly in all dimensions, specifically for the 4 cylinder version. Give it a hatchback … and call it a Vega. And if that’s sells well, add a Kammback variant. Offer it in Krypton Green (closest match to my ‘73 Vega GT) and I just might get back in a GM car after 36 years.

” For me, I’d take the more attractive Mustang any day, and frankly would rather have a Challenger than either–if the goal is big, brash, old-fashioned, obnoxious American muscle car, how can you top the Dodge?”

By and large, you cant top the Dodge. I’m partial to Mopars obviously, but if its your only car and you have to live with it every day, a Challenger R/T is the way to go. Scratches all the ego pumping, ‘gotta have a muscle car’ itches, and will put a smile on your face literally EVERY time you fire it up, but the reality is, theyre just damned good cars. The trunk and backseat are actually usable so there IS some honest practicality there, even if that’s not put on display. The beauty of the R/T is you still get the Hemi but can ditch those stupid ass 20″ wheels which look dumb (matter of opinion of course), ride like crap while adding performance robbing weight, pummeling your suspension, and insuring new tires are always needed. I ditched the factory 20’s on 2 vehicles for 17’s then 18’s respectively and its an absolute godsend in every way.

GM was kind of stuck on the styling of the latest Camaro and, ironically, the problem was the Challenger. When the original E-body Mopars came out in 1970, they were unabashed clones of the previous 1st gen f-body GM ponycars. So, when GM decided to come out with their own retro 1st gen Camaro, if they had stuck closer to the original, it would have looked like a clone of the Challenger!

So, to try and differentiate their retro ponycar, the new Camaro ended up looking way too much like a Hot Wheels car (especially in that Synergy Green color that looked just like one of the old Hot Wheels ‘Spectraflame’ colors). There were even Hot Wheels editions of the new Camaro. This all sounds like great fun until you actually have to drive one of these rather cartoon looking cars with absurdly high beltlines and narrow, slit windows.

Nice review. One thing we do know- the Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger OWN the sporty car segment. Those three models outsell all the Japanese and European brands combined by a margin of almost 2:1. So whatever the drawbacks these cars have (and there are many), this is where American’s shop to scratch that sports coupe itch.

It doesn’t seem all that long ago, but I remember when a car appeared in a car show as a “possible” forecast of the next model, car magazines would tell readers that the oversized wheel/tire packages would never make it to production, the exaggerated greenhouse would be deemed as unsafe, and the enormous amounts of horsepower would be dialed back for emissions and/or fuel economy reasons.
Well, here’s a car where none of that (seems?) to have happened. It went from styling exercise to showroom floor with few changes.

I saw a late model Camaro this morning. I guess it was a 2016, I don’t know these cars well enough to distinguish a 2010 from a 2017 model. It was quite attractive in a paint job that vaguely mimicked the Transformers Camaro, but reading this excellent review has made me wonder if I could live with a car like this as my daily driver.

BTW, a 7 inch touchscreen is on the small side for a car that sells for over $30K. And as someone who doesn’t drive many new cars, or even ride in many new cars, hard plastic can look and feel quite cheap, depending on where or how it is used. My sister has owned examples of 3 of the 4 generations of Prius. Toyota seems to be quite adept at making hard plastic feel like metal. Unfortunately, they use it in places where hard metal is not ideal. I noticed the same thing in a near new Avalon that I recently rode in, so it isn’t necessarily a cost cutting measure.

You picked a perfect car for experiencing Detroit. When in Rome, and all that.

I have no firsthand experience with one of these. From what I have read the Challenger is bigger than either of the other two, so it is more of a grand tourer than the Mustang and Camaro are. But if the back seat is not really something you will use on a regular basis, it is hard to see a wrong choice among the three.

My rental experience with a cheaper Camaro was less satisfying. The GF and I rented a beautiful, black 2017 RS from Avis to drive up the PCH from San Diego to San Francisco last summer. Maybe we’re just too old, but we hated it. Visibility is worse than any car I’ve ever driven. Trunk was terrible. Big, long doors, terrible. I get hat I must be past the sports car phase. The trip deteriorated around San Luis Obispo when the car had to be jump-started. After that, the voltmeter rarely ever got past 12.5 volts. Probably a bad battery in a car that showed only 3,000 miles. As we limped to SFO, various functions, including the radio and a/c, kept shutting down, I guess to keep what voltage was left to the engine. Reminded me of being present as elderly relatives passed away. On the plus side, handling and ride were great. Made a lot of engine noise, but it seemed to me much ado about very little.

This experience was fairly consistent with my previous luck with GM vehicles. Interestingly, a week’s rental for the Camaro was the best deal we could find on the Internet, a few bucks cheaper than renting a generic silver compact.

“Even in track mode impacts are well absorbed”. Forgive me if I’m a bit sceptical about this assessment of the Camaro’s ride quality. Well absorbed compared to what? A Sherman tank? A Lexus LS 460? A bit of context would be helpful.

Came for the car, stayed for the pictures! Great job getting backdrops for the car. I’ve never been there, but have been for a long time fascinated by how long and hard this great city has fallen.

I was planning on buying a Camaro in 2010, I really liked them when the new ones came out. I ended up getting a 2011 Mustang GT 5.0 instead. It just seemed like a better car at the time, and I’ve been happy with my decision.

My Dad did just that back in 2013. At 75, he was having his third midlife crisis and set out to but a Camaro because he loved its looks. Then he went for a test drive. He compared it to sitting in a cave. He bought a 2014 Mustang instead.

He and I just went to the Motor Trend International Auto Show in Baltimore last weekend. We again compared the new Mustang to the new Camaro. While the Mustang’s ergonomics have gotten a little better since his 2014 and my 2007, the Camaro actually seems worse. It went from sitting in a cave to being entombed in a sarcophagus. That beautiful black interior did not help.

I must agree with some of the other posters here, that for size and comfort, you’re probably better off with the Challenger.

A shot of Father and Son Mustangs here before he traded his in on a 2017 Accord, claiming he had to grow up sometime….. (I still have mine, though ;o)

I like the Challenger, but didn’t seriously consider one because they are considerably larger than either the Mustang or Camaro. My garage is small enough already. It’s also a lot heavier with similar power levels, so it’s not as fast. To get Mustang GT level performance, you have to go up to the SRT8, which is a lot more expensive.

In Brazil there are only a handful “new” Camaros and they are associated with a specific demographic ( new rich men, not necessarilly young, for example, football/soccer players, famous musicians, TV stars and semi-celebrities-entrepreneurs ). Could somebody please give some information if there’s any kind of demographics associated with this car in other markets, for example, USA Canada Mexico and maybe Europe ?

” I’ve always been a sedan man – they’re practical enough without carrying the stigma of vehicles that are too practical.”

Ive always found the 4 door sedan to be the epitome of having that straight laced, practical and economical stigma. The coming of the Charger, 300, SS and G8 help quell that somewhat, but those are atypical of what comes to mind when someone mentions ‘sedan’: Usually a grey or beige nondescript cammaccord. And Ive always found it REALLY odd when someone buys a big brawny muscle car but gets it in some greyscale color (such as the subject car) that’s more appropriate to a toyhonsan. Just strange to me.

Really great pics though, and a good read. For all its faults, if someone were to drag me to a GM dealership right now and allow me to drive off in anything I wanted, paid in full with the caveat that I had to actually own and drive it for x number of years, a Camaro SS is the only thing that would interest me in any way.

Modern RWD sedans have better proportions than modern coupes. The only coupe I find palatable is the Challenger(but I still think the 15+ Charger is better), otherwise the two door landscape has adopted the stubby tall proportions of a VW Bug, of which this Camaro is one of the worst offenders. The Charger on the other hand isn’t too far off from an old B-body coupe, and I suspect if there were a coupe version they’d be stupid and shorten the wheelbase, completely ruining it.

I’m betting these will end up popular several years from now in the enthusiast market, who, ironically, are currently having fun decrying them. They probably won’t hold their value so they will end up relative high performance bargains.

Great write-up William! It’s too bad that the sixth generation Camaro has the past and styling it does. I know that people love to hate it’s cartoony over the top styling, but these really are the best Camaro’s ever made, especially if you are a performance enthusiast. They are a big improvement over the 5th generation cars. People really should drive one of these cars before they pass judgement. The Alpha chassis and GM’s chassis tuning is world class. It really is just a phenomenally fun, rewarding and comfortable car to drive. I know this may not be enough to make up for its styling and other compromises for some people, but I personally can look past the styling once I am behind the wheel.

On top of that, the buff books are fawning all over these cars. It’s seems to win every comparison test and made the C/D ten best list Here is a quote form a Motor Trend test where it compared the BMW M4 to a Camaro 1SS which kind of sums up the car:

“The Camaro’s biggest weakness is its own badge…discounting the 1LE and Z/28, the Camaro was so bad for so long that it’s hard to take this car seriously against the M4. Until you start driving it. Yup. If how a car drives matters more to you than badge cachet, Chevrolet has you covered.”

My brother was car shopping for a Performance coupe a couple of years ago. He was initially leaning towards something from German (for the driving) or Japanese (for the reliability). I convinced him to look at the American pony cars (and to let me tag along for the road tests), which he had initially ruled out. The Challanger he found too big and didn’t have the best dynamics. It very much felt more like a modern muscle car, not sports car. The Mustang was much better all around, but when he drove a Camaro SS, it was clearly the winner of the three. The 6.2L V8 is just a beast, the 6-speed is slick shifting and smooth, and the driving dynamics are awesome. He ended up ordering a 2016 Camaro 1SS with 6-speed and all the performance upgrade (big brakes, magnetorheological suspension, exhaust, etc). The car ended up being late so he actually ended up getting one of the first 2017 Camaro’s in Canada early summer of 2016.

After two season with the car he still loves it. He drives it very aggressively, has had zero problems and it gets good gas mileage (relatively). Both of us are well over 6 feet and the car has lots of leg room for tall people, and headroom in the front is decent. I found driving the car the forward and side visibility wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be, but I do think short people are definitely at a disadvantage in this car. The blind spot visibility is bad and so is the rear visibility. My brother says he loves the car for his highway trips but doesn’t like it in city traffic due to the poor blind spot visibility. His buddy who is a big time Audi guy took it for a drive, but had dismissed it as an overpowered American muscle car beforehand. He was blown away by how well the car drove. Overall, the car is just a phenomenally satisfying machine, and it’s just unfortunate that it doesn’t have less polarizing styling.

I too had one of these as a rental. Of course it was an auto car. I have to say was not impressed with the power. I picked it up in the dark and so did not realize immediately it was an SS. I thought it was the RS six cylinder. About halfway through an hour drive I glanced down to adjust the volume button on the steering wheel and noticed the SS badge. Actually laughed out loud. Of course my experience may be colored by the fact that my ‘fast’ vehicle is a 700hp supercharged ‘15 Stang. :). Even so the SS felt weaker than I thought it should.

I almost purchased a 2017 SS. Great car. Handled well, great-feeling 6-speed shifter (loved the automatic rev-match downshift function), nice interior (by the way, the screen in the dash is tilted downward to avoid glare). The visibility was not all that bad, with the three mirrors properly adjusted.

The only thing stopping me was the the dealer’s refusal to negotiate on price, and their reluctance to factory order. I went to another dealership; same thing.

IMO, Detroit is leaving tons of money on the table with this. Take the Mustang or Camaro, keep the long hood and aggressive cowl and low roofline. Add a couple back doors and longer trunk and try to make the car somewhat livable. Give it a different name if Mustang and Camaro are all too holy to besmirched by a sedan.

I think there’s a ton of guys who would love to drive one of these, but then they remember the baby seat and end up with something like a 3 series or a Maxima.

I’ve long thought the same thing. In Ford’s case, they would never build a 4 door Mustang, but a 4 door Thunderbird has been done before so give the 4 door that name. Dodge has done essentially the same thing with the Charger and Challenger.

Rear headroom is much less than the early Camaro’s (mid 70’s is 36 inches) at 33 inches. Not sure that the rear seat was ever intended for grown ups to sit in for any of past Camaro’s much less the new ones.

Cadillac’s ATS and CTS are really very good handling cars with better utility. But for rear seat room, the XT5 is great with no hump in the center. Unfortunately the XT5’s handling is not in the same class.

A long time family friend owns a very clean 1969 light blue Camaro convertible with it’s original 307 Chevy 2BBL V8 and 3 speed automatic and white vinyl bucket seat interior. It goes out on every nice sunny day with the top down and gets looks and comments all the time. I told her to go check out a new 2017 blue Camaro convertible last summer with a black top and she was blown away. It was a V6 base model with 8 speed automatic and grey interior and the package containing the Bose system and upgraded 8″ touch screen plus a few other upgrades like a Camaro fender logo and upgraded floormats.

She took it out for a test drive and suddenly the back seat room, small trunk opening and visibility didn’t matter (with the top down of course) and she was blown away by how it drove and performed. The V6 sounded great and annihilated her old wheezy 307 V8. The seats were leaps and bounds more comfortable, the steering, ride, handling, braking and quietness were all light years better. Alas it was the near 39K sticker that killed it. Even with a 1500 discount and dealer cash on the hood it was way more than she wanted to pay so a lightly used 2016 or 2017 in a few years may be in order. The interesting thing is that her 1969 is probably worth more than the price of a new one today in its original unmodified and pristine condition.

I really want to like the Camaro, but I can’t get past the looks. It’s horrible looking. Too “squished”, and it has zero utility value. I can but a LOT of stuff, more than just one item into the trunk of my ’10 Challenger R/T that won’t even fit into the Camaro at all. The back seats were only used by my late dogs and the wife of a friend of mine, but they aren’t as awful as the back seat of a Mustang or Camaro.

Make it based off the 2nd Gen F-Body, a hatchback, so you can carry stuff in it, and we will talk, GM, until then, it’s another Challenger for me next year..

You can drive a Cruze at home and, while it’s a perfectly fine car, renting a Camaro (or a Mustang, or Challenger) just adds another distinctly American layer to your trip.

As a rule, I try to avoid renting anything I can drive at home.

A mate and I – actually the same mate from my Detroit trip – are thinking of doing a short CA/NV desert road trip later this year and we are figuring out what to rent. And a distinctly American road trip requires a distinctly American car…

I had a ’13 Camaro convertible with the V6 as a rental for my honeymoon back in May 2013. While it looked good, it frankly didn’t feel like a car with 300 HP under the hood. I never really wrung it out but the “butt dyno” wasn’t all that impressed. And the interior could best be described as “meh”. The best feature was the drop top, quite useful in the Florida Keys. I imagine a V8 would have helped the equation greatly–if you’re going to be excessive, do it excessively.

The current styling works quite well, though. A co-worker recently traded in his Silverado on a ’17 Camaro RS coupe in bright red. His is a V6 also, but nonetheless it’s a head-turner in a parking lot full of SUVs and generic sedans.

Nice to see, from your video, that ol’ Detroit is still loyal to the domestic makes that gave it life for the better part of a century: Not even one foreign nose or tail approaching you or leading you down the street!